contained herein as the objective is to now enjoin the swearing in of soto. if any recipient of these documents can fax them to: 202 354-3392 asap and provide a confirmation that such task has been accomplished to rjm so that the judge cannot claim invincible ignorance of what rjm was seeking on 8/7/09, rjm would be most grateful
cc://http://www.geocities.com/thirstforjustice/Categories_index(18USC3332(a)) 8/7/09, b.32, c., m. n.43 p.2
United States District Court for the District of Columbia Robert J. More, ISMA’s Campaign to Make the World Safe For Innocence Once Again, Every Person God Can Still Justify Not Hating as Third Party Plaintiff, All Those in Such Group Lacking the Use of Reason as Next Friend Petitioner/Plaintiff V Case # Mr. L. Gainer - Sergeant at Arms of the United States Senate, Ms Nancy Erickson, Secretary of the United States Senate, Majority Leader of the United States Senate, Mr. Harry Reid, Supreme Court of the United States Chief Justice John Roberts, any “Justice” of SCOTUS who could issue the “oath” in the absence of the Chief Justice
SECOND SUPERCEDING COMPONENT OF 8/6/09 OF COMPLAINT OF 8/4/09, TO BE SUPERCEDED PRIOR TO 9/5/09 AND PERIODICALLY THEREAFTER WHICH IS ACCOMPANIED BY A PETITION FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, ACCOMPANIED BY A NOTIFICATION OF NON-CONSENT….
Introduction: Based upon what has transpired since RJM overnight fed-exed the initial component of this complaint of 8/4/09 on 8/4/09 to this Court which was received thereby at 10:47 a.m. on 8/5/09, RJM herein incorporates by reference the entirety of the contents of the FIRST SUPERCEDING COMPONENT OF 8/6/09 OF COMPLAINT OF 8/4/09, TO BE SUPERCEDED PRIOR TO 9/5/09 AND PERIODICALLY THEREAFTER WHICH IS ACCOMPANIED…. except those contents a revised version of which is contained herein, herein as if fully set forth herein. The purpose of this component of this complaint is to add the Chief Justice of SCOTUS as a Defendant to the case this document concerns (“this case”) in order to enjoin any “swearing-in” (aka “oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the (united) (United) States of America eliciting and remitting”) on 8/7/09 unless and until the relief provided in the declaratory judgment sought herein would have been provided.
Parties Robert J. More the Petitioner/Plaintiff in this case is a resident of Chicago, IL who was the appellant in Appeal # 08-1263-cv in the CCA 2. The Secretary of the USS, Sergeant at Arms of the USS , and Majority Leader of the USS are agents of the USS named as Respondents/Defendants in this case, along with the USS itself. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States John Roberts, any “Justice” of SCOTUS who could issue the oath in the absence of the Chief Justice Jurisdiction This Court possesses jurisdiction over this case pursuant to the provisions of 28 USC 1331 (federal question) and 28 USC 2201 and 2202 (declaratory judgment). Venue There is no case RJM has read in which a House of Congress was listed as a Defendant which had not been filed in the USDC for the District of Columbia, so RJM presumes that this Court must be the appropriate venue.
Facts 65. The developments that transpired on 8/6/09 in the adjudication of this case will be chronicled in future versions of this complaint and in other documents which will be composed as component parts of the injustice rectification project of which this component of the complaint presently pending in this case is a component part. 66. The requirements of Local Rule 65.1 regarding the TRO of 8/7/09 have been satisfied as can be verified by this Court by its calling RJM at 312 545-1890 and holding a TRO hearing prior to any swearing in of S. Sotomaor to a position on the SCOTUS or by its calling the Clerk of the Supreme Court of the u.S. of A. and speaking to the Deputy Clerk Mary __________ there. Prayer for Relief RJM herein seeks to have the swearing in of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the U.S. by the SCOTUS Chief Justice and or any other “Justice” of such Court scheduled for 8/7/09 enjoined until the evidence referenced herein supra can be read or otherwise entered into the public record of a new Senate Confirmation Proceeding to be conducted in the Senate of the united States of America based upon her actual record as a federal judge and in regard to the activity conducted by her since she was nominated to a position on the SCOTUS, as distinct from the record thereof which she has presented to the Senate and the American Public, as the members of the public are entitled to informed votes of their representatives and to know how their representatives would have voted had they possessed truthful answers, that is answers fully disclosing the information sought in a given question contained in the questionnaire that SS received from the Senate Judiciary Committee (“questionnaire”) or to have this Court sign a copy of the accompanying “Motion and Proposed Order… Unconstitutionality…RJM…” and subsequent to the procurement of such relief, to procure a declaratory judgment, declaring the following:
Declaratory Judgment Regarding Confirmation Proceedings in the United States Senate of Judicial Nominees No Senate vote on a confirmation of any nominee for any federal judgeship shall ever be conducted in the case of any confirmation proceedings ever conducted in regard to the nomination of a given nominee, unless and until individuals and/or parties whose cases a given nominee would have adjudicated in any judicial theatre established pursuant to any law(s) of the united States of America or any political subdivision thereof which adjudication(s) would not have been listed as answers to the questions included in any questionnaire which a given nominee would have received from, completed and submitted to - as a requirement for consideration of a given judicial nominee’s qualifications for a given judicial office for which he or she would have been nominated - the members of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate of the united States of America (“SJC”) in a given instance, would have been provided an opportunity to (present to the Senate of the United States of America in such a ) – the entity responsible to ensure that the authority and power of the appointment of federal judges would not be vested solely in the Executive Branch of the government pursuant to the Appointments Clause of the Constitution of the u.S. of A. – evidence of her conduct in cases which would not have been included in the list of all cases in regard to the adjudication of which she would have participated according to such a formula that no evidence presented thereto would not end up in a public record of any proceedings conducted in any confirmation of a given nominee, the consideration of which by any given citizen who could justifiably be classified as a “member” of what would constitute at any given juncture in human history, that component of the population of the united States of America to which reference could justifiably be made as the “public at large” and that component of the world’s people who would constitute the “mankind” for whose opinion the Author of the Declaration of Independence and its Signatories manifested a conspicuous concern to demonstrate a “decent respect” in refusing to severe the bonds which had bound them to the English people without providing an enumeration of the causes which they asserted compelled the separation(“citizen”) that no member of the USS could justifiably and legitimately claim that he or she would have been invincibly (inculpably) ignorant of the evidence which would have been presented in a the proceedings conducted in a given nominee’s confirmation hearing process of the judicial activity of a given nominee by any and all citizens who would possess evidence of such judicial activity in regard to the adjudication of any case which would not have been listed as a case in the adjudication of which a given nominee would have participated in any answers submitted to any questionnaire the completion and submission of which would have constituted a requirement for the procurement of a Senate vote on a given nominee’s confirmation to a given federal judgeship and/or any other relief which would eliminate the injury RJM will have incurred if Sotomayor is confirmed without the evidence which RJM and Richard Cordero possess of her misrepresentations to the SJC and the activity conducted by her in regard to the cases which were not included in the list of cases in the adjudication of which she has participated as a federal judge, and that no activity of this Court in the adjudication of this case could ever be used to preclude, prevent and/or prohibit RJM from filing any other legal proceeding in regard to the dispute Appeal #08-1263 CCA 2 concerns, since RJM will not have been provided a full and fair opportunity to resolve the issues such dispute concerns in any proceeding conducted in the matters this complaint concerns, tangential to such concerns as this complaint no doubt is., and any confirmation and/or appointment not based upon the conducting of the confirmation hearings and vote conducted according to the formula formulated herein supra shall be null and void and of no force and effect. (Note: order to procure a TRO enjoining any vote on the Sotomayor nomination on 8/6/09, RJM will under protest consent to have the word “united” capitalized in any TRO and/or declaratory judgment any court would issue in regard to the matters this complaint concerns, subject to permitting RJM to explain the reasons that RJM would insist that such term be used only in lower case in any final formulation of any declaratory judgment which would be issued in regard to the matters this document concerns)
Under penalty of perjury pursuant to the provisions of 28 USC 1946, I aver to the veracity of all factual averments in regard to which I possess percipient knowledge contained herein and as to any averments made upon information and believe, that I verily believe such averments to be true. Robert J. More
Robert J. More P.O. Box 6926 Chicago, IL 60680 312 545-1890 email@example.com
United States District Court for the District of Columbia Robert J. More Petitioner V Case # Sergeant at Arms of the United States Senate L Gainer, Secretary of the United States Senate Erickson, Majority Leader of the United States Senate, Mr. Harry Reid, Respondents
PETITION OF 8/7/09 PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 65.1 FOR ISSUANCE OF A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER ENJOINING ANY SWEARING IN OF JUDGE SONIA SOTOMAYOR (“JSS”) TO A POSITION ON THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES (“SCOTUS”) (“SWEARING IN…SS”) UNLESS AND UNTIL THIS COURT WOULD DECLARE THE VOIDNESS AND THE NULLITY OF THE SENATE VOTE TAKEN ON 8/6/09 TO CONFIRM SJJ TO A POSITION ON THE SCOTUS AND ISSUE AN ORDER REQUIRING THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN THE ACCOMPANYING “…SECOND SUPERCEDING COMPONENT OF 8/7/09 OF COMPLAINT OF 8/4/09…” TO BE ENTERED INTO THE OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS CONDUCTED IN WHAT WOULD CONSTITUTE A SECOND CONFIRMATION HEARING AND VOTE OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE REGARDING THE NOMINATION OF SS
Now comes the Petitioner Robert J. More (“RJM”) to move this Court to issue a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) according to the terms and conditions included in the title to this document. RJM herein provides notice that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America has been informed to the extent it was possible for RJM to inform him of the filing and/or presentation for filing to this Court of this document and the complaint to which it corresponds, of the filing and/or presentation for filing thereof, via RJM’s providing to Deputy Clerk Mary ________at 202 479-3031 on 8/6/09 notice that a copy of this document would be posted at: http://www.geocities.com/thirstforjustice/Sotomayor-Lawsuit prior to any swearing in that would be conducted in regard to the Sotomayor “confirmation” prior to the commencement of any oral telephonic hearing and/or any other type of adjudication which would be conducted in regard to issue of the issuance of a TRO in the matters this petition concerns (“these matters”) on 8/6/09.
Under penalty of perjury pursuant to the provisions of 28 USC 1946, I aver to the veracity of all factual averments in regard to which I possess percipient knowledge contained herein and as to any averments made upon information and believe, that I verily believe such averments to be true.